BNUMBER:  B-257515
DATE:  December 1, 1994
TITLE:  Andrews Forwarders, Inc.

**********************************************************************

Matter of:   Andrews Forwarders, Inc.

File:        B-257515

Date:     December 1, 1994
                                                                                                                
DIGEST

Service member's failure to note visible damage to rear of a 
television set at the time of delivery is not a bar to recovery if the 
carrier did not note damage to the rear panel of the set on the 
inventory when it obtained it from the member.  The member 
subsequently notified the carrier that the set did not operate after 
delivery, and the repair estimate submitted with the claim indicates 
that damage to the rear panel and components attached to the rear 
panel was caused by impact.

DECISION

Andrews Forwarders, Inc., requests that we review our settlement 
upholding the Air Force's setoff of $108 from money otherwise owed to 
Andrews to recover the costs of transit damage to a television set 
owned by a service member while moving her household goods.[1]  We 
affirm our prior settlement.

The carrier's agent obtained the television from the member's 
residence in Germany on March 26, 1991, and delivered it to the member 
at Eglin AFB, Florida, on May 14, 1991.  On July 12, 1991, the member 
dispatched a Notice of Loss or Damage (DD Form 1840R) to the carrier 
in which she stated that the on/off switch did not function on her 
27-inch Sony television (item 174).  In her claim dated August 28, 
1991, the service member stated that the audio did not work with the 
remote control, and the supporting repair bill (a copy of which was 
provided to Andrews on August 28, 1991, with the Air Force's 
subordinated claim) stated that the rear panel was broken, that the 
amplifier board and the video driver panel which were attached to the 
rear panel were damaged, and that the damage was caused by impact.

Andrews contends that it was not liable for damage to the television 
because mechanical problems such as these are not visible by ordinary 
inspection at time of receipt of the household goods.  The carrier 
also notes that if there had been damage to the rear panel during the 
move, the member would have noted it either at delivery or on the DD 
Form 1840R.

Our prior settlement is supported by the record.  Generally, a carrier 
accepts a shipment only in apparent good order.  See Paul Arpin Van 
Lines, Inc., B-193182, June 16, 1981, 81-1 CPD  para.  492.  Thus, a carrier 
is not expected to play a television set to determine if pre-existing 
damage exists in its operation.  Compare American Vanpac Van Lines, 
Inc., B-252763.2, June 29, 1993; and Interstate Van Lines, Inc., 
B-197911.5, June 22, 1989.  However, prior to obtaining the item, 
Andrews could have determined by visual inspection whether the rear 
panel was damaged, and if so, Andrews would have been required to note 
the damage on the inventory.  The carrier-prepared inventory does not 
indicate any pre-existing damage of that nature.  On the other hand, 
the repair bill does indicate visible impact-caused damage to the rear 
panel.  Thus, the record indicates that damage to the rear panel had 
taken place sometime after Andrews obtained possession of the set.

Andrews contends that if it had damaged the rear panel in transit, the 
service member would have indicated this on the DD Form 1840R.  While 
the service member was not very precise in describing the damage on DD 
Form 1840R, she was not required to be.  See Continental Van Lines, 
Inc., B-228702, Dec. 16, 1988.  The notice clearly indicated that 
there was a problem with the television.  Thus, adjudicators from this 
Office and the Air Force reasonably found that the damage had taken 
place prior to delivery.

We affirm our prior settlement.

 /s/ Seymour Efros
 for Robert P. Murphy
Acting General Counsel

1. The shipment moved under Personal Property government bill of 
lading GP-162,731 (Yvonne Lofton).